2021 Offseason Thread

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, sak22 said:

I don't imagine, people always use the best case scenario in these what if's.  If Backlund isn't around does Tkachuk become what he is?  I still don't know if Bennett becomes anything significant, whereas Tkachuk became an all-star, where his development may have changed if he never played with someone like Backlund.  It's not hard to imagine a #4 pick not living up to his draft position because there is usually 1 or 2 top 5 picks every year, just unfortunate it happens the only time the Flames picked there.

 

38 minutes ago, kehatch said:

 

Exactly. Most teams develop in cycles.

 

If you have a team capable of being competitive then you invest in being competitive for as long as you can. You hope you get a deep run or three during this time, and if things go very well a cup. 

 

When that isn't an option anymore, you spend your assets on as many picks and prospects as you can get, and you hope like crazy you pick high in a draft that has the caliber of prospects you need. 

 

But once those prospects are ready to join the team you surround them with the type of players you need to instill the right culture, including the demand to win. The combination of the evolving prospects combined with the support players makes you competitive, so you start investing in being competitive again. 

 

Guys like Backlund show players the right way to play, and they are able to take the tough minutes to shelter players that might need it. I would have loved if Bennett would have taken Backlund job. He had 6 years to do it. But gifting Bennett the job and enduring a long bunch of losses while he figures it out, if he figures it out, isn't how you develop a team full of good players. 

 

So I've explained why Backlund is so misunderstood as a Flames.  Why do you guys think he's so misunderstood?

[jjgallow]

21 hours ago, The_People1 said:

Anyways, you can argue none of this is Backlund's fault but rightly or wrongly, he blocked the path of Sam Bennett's development and so had he been gone, then rainbows and sunshine with Bennett as our 2nd line C.

 

Exactly this, I completely agree (although this won't necessarily bolster your arguement lol...don't you fear, jj's in your corner)

 

It is pretty funny that you are really not a fan of Backlund but are left defending him on merit.    The strange turns offseason discussions take lol.

 

He was a projected #1 C when we drafted him, by nearly all scouts.  Period.  Not a debate.  We Don't need to debate that.  He was a fantastic pick.  A high ceiling high risk player.   He was poorly developed (if we were looking for a 1C) but Still turned out very well.

 

We....tend to use our top picks to draft roughly the same position  (LW or LHS C) over and over and over and over again.     So a backlog should not surprise anyone.    

 

That said, Backlund and Bennet were both BPA picks, so in this case it really was just circumstance.   We developed both to be 3-4th line Centers.  We got what we asked for.   A trade of one of them (when they had high value) or of the center ahead of them, would have allowed for their proper development.   If the coach was willing to play ball.

 

So is it the scouts fault for drafting so many in the same position? (yes but not in this case)

Is it the coach's fault for how he developed them?

Is it the players fault?

 

IMHO, it is systemic, and you look at the GM or higher.   Even now the Flames are made up almost entirely of LHS forwards with little or no chance of meaningful development.

[travel_dude]

We drafted 3 C's in a row because we needed depth there; Janko was a long term project, while Monahan and Bennett were not.

Then a LW, a D, a LW and a C with a RW coming last as 1st rounders.

If we choose the BPA at the time (even if you don't agree Pelletier was better than Lavoie), then we are doing what all teams strive to do.

Get the best player for their team.

We ignored picking up high level forwards and D in the draft due to picks being traded.

At some point you need to refresh those spots.

Had we drafted 4 D in the last 4 years, we would have a lot less forward prospects.

So we would then be accused of only drafting one position.

[cross16]

16 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

 

So I've explained why Backlund is so misunderstood as a Flames.  Why do you guys think he's so misunderstood?

 

Two reasons:

1- Poor and unfair fan expectations from the draft. He was labelled as the future number one center before he even played his first game and likely by many who had never even seen him play. So even though he turned out to be tremendous value for where he was taken and a great player people still remember those silly expectations.  I agree with you on his limitations, he doesn't have the best shot, but those limitations were always there and are very typical of prospects where he was ranked. 

2- An incomplete understanding of how players can impact a game. People look at this raw point totals and say he isn't a top 6 center. First off, that criteria is pretty bogus and arbitrary anyway, and 2nd it's incomplete. If you look at Backlund's 5 on 5 production he has consistently been in and around the top 50 for center the last several seasons, so how is that not very good for a 2nd line center?  Because we've picked some arbitrary 60 point cut off, which also happens to ignore the fact that his PP production isn't much because the Flames prefer to stack their first PP unti and also use Backs as a top PK. Why punish him for decisions that are not his own?

[Horsman1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

first of all.. top 50 in centers does not impress me.. if we are a top 12 team... then there are 20 teams below us that have a top line center.. that doesn;t mean our second line center has to be below them.. I expect that our second line center be no worse than the 20 -25th best center in the league...

Two reasons:

1- Poor and unfair fan expectations from the draft. He was labelled as the future number one center before he even played his first game and likely by many who had never even seen him play. So even though he turned out to be tremendous value for where he was taken and a great player people still remember those silly expectations.  I agree with you on his limitations, he doesn't have the best shot, but those limitations were always there and are very typical of prospects where he was ranked. 

2- An incomplete understanding of how players can impact a game. People look at this raw point totals and say he isn't a top 6 center. First off, that criteria is pretty bogus and arbitrary anyway, and 2nd it's incomplete. If you look at Backlund's 5 on 5 production he has consistently been in and around the top 50 for center the last several seasons, so how is that not very good for a 2nd line center?  Because we've picked some arbitrary 60 point cut off, which also happens to ignore the fact that his PP production isn't much because the Flames prefer to stack their first PP unti and also use Backs as a top PK. Why punish him for decisions that are not his own?

 

[Horsman1]

1 minute ago, Horsman1 said:

 

all I was really saying was that as a third line player.. regardless of team.. backlund makes too much in the current cap world. I like backlund.. in fact.. if he was a little more aggressive and outspoken ,he would be my choice for captain

[sak22]

25 minutes ago, Horsman1 said:

all I was really saying was that as a third line player.. regardless of team.. backlund makes too much in the current cap world. I like backlund.. in fact.. if he was a little more aggressive and outspoken ,he would be my choice for captain

Danault got more money this offseason coming off a year where he got less than 30 points combined regular and post season, his total production was lower than Backlunds regular season.  

Jordan Staal makes 6 million, hasn't exceeded 50 points in a season since he got to Carolina, only 1 50 point season

Adam Henrique makes 5.8, career high 51 points, last 3 seasons worse than Backlunds production

Charlie Coyle makes 5.2, one 56 point season but has a lower point per game rate than Backlund

Pageau makes 5, career high 43 points.

 

I wouldn't argue that Backlund is underpaid, but in no way would he fit in the overpaid conversation

Just the way I see how salary structures for more veteran guys.

If you can get 80+ points a season you get 9 million+

If you are in the 60-80 range the salary is in the 6-8 million

If you are in the 40-60 range you can seek a 4-6 million 

20-40 can get 2-4 million.

[Horsman1]

15 hours ago, sak22 said:

Danault got more money this offseason coming off a year where he got less than 30 points combined regular and post season, his total production was lower than Backlunds regular season.  

Jordan Staal makes 6 million, hasn't exceeded 50 points in a season since he got to Carolina, only 1 50 point season

Adam Henrique makes 5.8, career high 51 points, last 3 seasons worse than Backlunds production

Charlie Coyle makes 5.2, one 56 point season but has a lower point per game rate than Backlund

Pageau makes 5, career high 43 points.

 

I wouldn't argue that Backlund is underpaid, but in no way would he fit in the overpaid conversation

Just the way I see how salary structures for more veteran guys.

If you can get 80+ points a season you get 9 million+

If you are in the 60-80 range the salary is in the 6-8 million

If you are in the 40-60 range you can seek a 4-6 million 

20-40 can get 2-4 million.

yes.. all valid points.. but on MY team.. the third line center doesn;t get that kind of money.. I save it for the top two lines ans goalie and top d line

 

[travel_dude]

The problem is that Backlund is not a 3rd line C.  He plays almost equal minutes to the other C's.

We pay him similar money as Lindholm (value deal) and less than Monahan.

Backlund does what he does.

Not a big change year to year.

My issue is that he is aging.

Will he maintain his production as long as a Bergeron did?

We keep looking for the next Backlund, but nobody has ever got there.

Bennett was never close, yet he's about the best chance we had.

 

If we trade Backlund, we need another younger Backlund.

The points don't matter as much as the role he performed.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, Horsman1 said:

yes.. all valid points.. but on MY team.. the third line center doesn;t get that kind of money.. I save it for the top two lines ans goalie and top d line

 

 

I understand in philosophy except the 3rd line Center is pretty important so paying up to $6-mil is still okay.

 

LW - $10-mil - RW

LW - $8-mil - RW

LW - $6-mil - RW

LW - $2-mil - RW

 

I think that's an ideal use of cap space.  You want to build a team strong down the middle with good D and G.  Find value Wingers as filler.

[robrob74]

4 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I understand in philosophy except the 3rd line Center is pretty important so paying up to $6-mil is still okay.

 

LW - $10-mil - RW

LW - $8-mil - RW

LW - $6-mil - RW

LW - $2-mil - RW

 

I think that's an ideal use of cap space.  You want to build a team strong down the middle with good D and G.  Find value Wingers as filler.

I still think that’s too much. 
 

id go:

 

10

5-7 range

4-6 range

1

[travel_dude]

7 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I understand in philosophy except the 3rd line Center is pretty important so paying up to $6-mil is still okay.

 

LW - $10-mil - RW

LW - $8-mil - RW

LW - $6-mil - RW

LW - $2-mil - RW

 

I think that's an ideal use of cap space.  You want to build a team strong down the middle with good D and G.  Find value Wingers as filler.

 

1 minute ago, robrob74 said:

I still think that’s too much. 
 

id go:

 

10

5-7 range

4-6 range

1

 

I think we have to take into account present and future value.  $5m top 6 C are pretty rare or maybe not that good.

We are lucky right now to have 3 in the $6m or less range.

But that means we have three #2C instead of one or two #1C.

 

Having a Eichel, Monahan (or Lindholm) and a Backlund is a pretty strong depth at C.  

We replace Monahan or Backlund with Dvorak, we are less deep.

[sak22]

20 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I still think that’s too much. 
 

id go:

 

10

5-7 range

4-6 range

1

I'm more along the lines of your thinking, I always prefer having at least one on an ELC.  If the player on the ELC is more of a 2nd or 3rd liner, I'm fine going a little higher on the #4C on a short term deal, but ideally I want at least one player on an ELC at every position, except goalie unless one forces their way.

[robrob74]

34 minutes ago, sak22 said:

I'm more along the lines of your thinking, I always prefer having at least one on an ELC.  If the player on the ELC is more of a 2nd or 3rd liner, I'm fine going a little higher on the #4C on a short term deal, but ideally I want at least one player on an ELC at every position, except goalie unless one forces their way.

 

 

Yup! We could use some fresh eyes in the organization. Remind some of the vets what it means to be in the NHL, the excitement. Plus they tend to bridge and allow you to have depth on the roster.

[conundrumed]

It's almost time to get the PTOs in place and find out which plugs will keep our ELCs in the A.

Keep wondering if Phillips will ever get a look.

Would've been nice for BT to accomplish more this off-season, but the devil's in the details I guess.

 

[kehatch]

15 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

It's almost time to get the PTOs in place and find out which plugs will keep our ELCs in the A.

Keep wondering if Phillips will ever get a look.

Would've been nice for BT to accomplish more this off-season, but the devil's in the details I guess.

 

 

Phillips might be a tough sell. He makes Gaudreau look big, but he doesn't have the offensive toolkit to play in the top 6. I hope to be wrong with Phillips, but I don't know if we have an NHL player in him. But there are definitely a few young guys I hope get a long look. 

 

Gawdin is a competent 4 line C, though his upside is limited. Zary or Pelletier could be a dark horse to make the team, but the safe bet is for them to start in the AHL. 

 

Ruzicka would be my summer picks of an ELC to make the team. He led the AHL club in scoring in his sophomore season, and looked decent in a brief call up. 

 

But if you expand the list beyond ELCs and instead look at low priced rookies the two guys I think should make an impact this season are Vlader and Mackey. Vlader is likely the backup, and Mackay I think has a lot of upside and shoes he is NHL ready when called up last season. You could put Kylington on that list, but I have never been a big Kylington fan. 

 

And of course you still have Valimaki who is younger then the two D above, though he is already a proven NHL player. 

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It's almost time to get the PTOs in place and find out which plugs will keep our ELCs in the A.

Keep wondering if Phillips will ever get a look.

Would've been nice for BT to accomplish more this off-season, but the devil's in the details I guess.

 

 

Flames should be doing like a dozen PTOs, not the typical 1 or 2.

 

I gotta be completely honest, to not be able to fill out he third and fourth lines demonstrates an extreme lack of creativity.   This is Such a doable thing and yet we never do it, it's not even the hard part.   The hard part is your first line, and that takes real planning, which we don't do.

 

We have become a second line team.  Few real first liners (except on LW), with a strong second line and not a lot below it.

[conundrumed]

43 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Flames should be doing like a dozen PTOs, not the typical 1 or 2.

 

I gotta be completely honest, to not be able to fill out he third and fourth lines demonstrates an extreme lack of creativity.   This is Such a doable thing and yet we never do it, it's not even the hard part.   The hard part is your first line, and that takes real planning, which we don't do.

 

We have become a second line team.  Few real first liners (except on LW), with a strong second line and not a lot below it.

Makes you wonder who gets to PTO level?

Galchenyuk, Vatanan, Donato?

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, kehatch said:

 

Phillips might be a tough sell. He makes Gaudreau look big, but he doesn't have the offensive toolkit to play in the top 6. I hope to be wrong with Phillips, but I don't know if we have an NHL player in him. But there are definitely a few young guys I hope get a long look. 

 

Gawdin is a competent 4 line C, though his upside is limited. Zary or Pelletier could be a dark horse to make the team, but the safe bet is for them to start in the AHL. 

 

Ruzicka would be my summer picks of an ELC to make the team. He led the AHL club in scoring in his sophomore season, and looked decent in a brief call up. 

 

But if you expand the list beyond ELCs and instead look at low priced rookies the two guys I think should make an impact this season are Vlader and Mackey. Vlader is likely the backup, and Mackay I think has a lot of upside and shoes he is NHL ready when called up last season. You could put Kylington on that list, but I have never been a big Kylington fan. 

 

And of course you still have Valimaki who is younger then the two D above, though he is already a proven NHL player. 

I agree with most of your overview, although Gawdin I just don't see it. Just too slow.

[travel_dude]

 

4 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Makes you wonder who gets to PTO level?

Galchenyuk, Vatanan, Donato?

 

Well those are players I like for this team, but I don't know if any of them is PTO invited.

It's a safe way to get a look at them and then sign them, but I think most will get deals.

There are a few things blocking some of the finishing pieces for a lot of teams.

Eichel, Tarasenko, and a couple others that are in play.

They get in the way of teams looking for C's, as the teams in on Eichel can't trade a C unless they got Eichel.

 

[conundrumed]

13 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

 

Well those are players I like for this team, but I don't know if any of them is PTO invited.

It's a safe way to get a look at them and then sign them, but I think most will get deals.

There are a few things blocking some of the finishing pieces for a lot of teams.

Eichel, Tarasenko, and a couple others that are in play.

They get in the way of teams looking for C's, as the teams in on Eichel can't trade a C unless they got Eichel.

 

Seems unlikely they are hold ups at this point. No one is paying the ask, the ask isn't dropping, move along.

I mean sure Eichel's a great player, so was Lindros. Add in the health status runaround, walkaway. Why bother?

[travel_dude]

52 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Seems unlikely they are hold ups at this point. No one is paying the ask, the ask isn't dropping, move along.

I mean sure Eichel's a great player, so was Lindros. Add in the health status runaround, walkaway. Why bother?

 

I think they may have been holdups for the last month.

Teams may be of the opinion now to move on.

The time for surgery and recovery is making this less and less likely.

At the same time, there has been very little action.

There are probably about 5 teams looking at C.

And multiple teams looking to upgrade D.

 

I don't think we are set.

We have done nothing to address the situation many have complained about.

I doubt BT wants to go into the season with simply a couple of PTO's. 

[conundrumed]

17 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

I think they may have been holdups for the last month.

Teams may be of the opinion now to move on.

The time for surgery and recovery is making this less and less likely.

At the same time, there has been very little action.

There are probably about 5 teams looking at C.

And multiple teams looking to upgrade D.

 

I don't think we are set.

We have done nothing to address the situation many have complained about.

I doubt BT wants to go into the season with simply a couple of PTO's. 

He does that every year. Perhaps he tried to make moves but didn't like the ask/return.

Can't win them all. He got better depth at G and bottom lines. Coleman's a good add.

D leaves something to be desired. Need younger players to take another good step.

Different and short offseason, maybe moves will be made into the season.

[travel_dude]

7 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

He does that every year. Perhaps he tried to make moves but didn't like the ask/return.

Can't win them all. He got better depth at G and bottom lines. Coleman's a good add.

D leaves something to be desired. Need younger players to take another good step.

Different and short offseason, maybe moves will be made into the season.

 

Sometimes it's the team he's dealing with won't budge.

He want's player X and the other team wants Y + Z.

Not being willing to give up Z is not completely wrong, but he doesn't close.

 

There have been other things at play different than this year.

We have available cap, so we don't have to restrict to money in and money out.

We can still do something major.

You may be right though.

I just have this sense that something akin to a shakeup is coming.

Not for the sake of making a trade, but a shakeup of the core.

Gio was step one, whether that the best idea or not.

Adding depth at C and in the middle/bottom six should be looked at.

Adding a good D would also help.

 

I realize that we can't do it all.

We should be able to improve what we had last year, without just relying on ELC's to take major steps.

 

[zima]

IMO I think owner ship do not care about putting a great team together they know fans will go to games no matter what we put on the ice it has been so long since we have seen a game in the dome or where ever we play the next few yrs that they will play what they have. As usual they add a couple of suppose to be good players and we hope that these new guys will actually try and make a difference or just go out and play just enough to get there pay day and get bought out just like Neal and half the other UFA's